More on the Simon van de Passe Engraving

The Simon van de Passe engraving of 1616. For a general introduction to this image and its context with other portraits of Pocahontas, see the main Portraits page.

This page will cover certain aspects of the portrait in more detail, namely the inscription, the ostrich feather fan, the beaver hat, and the artist's skill (or lack thereof) in depicting a Powhatan Indian.

An interesting (I hope) addition to this page is in the Inscription section below, where I quote a visitor to this site on the Matoaka vs Matoaks variation.

High res image of the Van de Passe engraving on Wikimedia Commons

More to come!

The inscription

There is much information printed on this engraving, but you will find little analysis of it anywhere. Prepare to be blown away by what is written a bit further below as offered by a visitor to this website, Jean Fontaine of Quebec.

But first, under the portrait in script is the following:

Ætatis suæ 21. Ao [according to Merriam-Webster, anno ætatis suæ means "in the year of her age", the age being 21; we can assume the Ao (with the 'o' raised) is an abbreviation of anno]
1616 [the year the portrait was made; this is our source for Pocahontas being 21 in the year 1616]
Matoaks als Rebecka daughter to the mighty Prince Powhatan Emperour of Attanoughkomouck als virginia converted and baptized in the Christian faith, and wife to the wor.ff Mr: Joh: Rolff. [Attanoughkomouck is a variation of Tsenacommacah, aka Tsenacomoco, the Powhatan word for what is now Tidewater Virginia; Joh: is an abbreviation of John; Rolff is a variation of Rolfe]
Si:PaSs:Sculp: [abbreviation of the engraver's name and profession/title, Simon van de Passe Sculptor]
ComptonHolland excud: [basically, published by Compton Holland. According to Encyclo.co.uk, "excud:" means "He [or she] struck [this]. A printer or engraver's mark, 'made by' [followed by the person's name], used to identify the person who executed, or completed, the work." In this case, the company is named here, though the engraver - Van de Passe - is also named nearby.]

Encircling the portrait in capital letters is the Latin inscription:

MATOAKA ALS REBECCA FILIA POTENTISS: PRINC: POWHATANI IMP: VIRGINIÆ. [This means "Matoaks, also known as Rebecca, daughter of the powerful prince Powhatan of the empire of Virginia]

Now here's the exciting part .... What if Pocahontas's private name was never Matoaka? There is reason to believe that the inscription below the portrait is the actual name, Matoaks, sometimes spelled Matoax, which is phonetically the same. I am printing this here thanks to an observation by a visitor to this website, Jean Fontaine of Quebec. He wrote the following on May 15, 2021 in the contact form of this site:

" ... when I first saw her 1616 engraved portrait by Simon van de Passe, I assumed that the "MATOAKA" name in the Latin title on the oval frame was simply an ad hoc Latinization of the name "Matoaks" that can be read in the English caption engraved below the portrait, since the whole Latin inscription is basically an abridged translation of the caption. The same way the names "Henry" and "Mary" would, in those days, be Latinized as "HENRICVS" and "MARIA" for the sake of a Latin inscription in a portrait, I assumed that the translator of the caption gave the name "Matoaks" an "-a" ending, which is expected for Latin female names and feminine nouns. It would seem much less probable that the "Matoaks" form in the caption, with its strange "-aks" ending, is an Anglicization of "Matoaka" than the other way around, that is, "Matoaka" being a Latinization of "Matoaks".

Are there earlier instances of the "Matoaka" variant in a non-Latin context?

If not, my uninformed guess would be that the "Matoaks" variant is closer to the original form, and the "Matoaka" Latinized variant was popularized by the 1616 engraving, where the "Matoaks" form is not helped by the fact that it is much less visually striking than the large "MATOAKA" near the sitter's face.

"Matoaks" would also be consistent with the similar sounding "Matoax" variant mentioned elsewhere.

I suppose a search for the earliest instances of each variant would be the only way to try to establish their genealogy." - Jean Fontaine

My comment:
This makes so much sense! I can't believe I haven't seen this anywhere before. Certainly the Matoaks/Matoax spellings appear in some articles, but the Matoaka spelling and pronunciation seems to have taken over as the presumed correct version. I need to research this more, but for now, I'm more comfortable with Matoaks as the actual name rather than Matoaka. Thank you Jean Fontaine!

More to come ...

Neither Matoaks nor Matoaka were used in early chronicler writings prior to publication of the Van de Passe engraving. Inconveniently, the only reference to Pocahontas's private name was by Alexander Whitaker, who offered the variation Matoa.

"Sir the Colony here is much better. Sir Thomas Dale our religious and valiant Governour, hath now brough that to passe, which never before could be effected. For by warre upon our enemies, and kinde usage of our friends, he hath brought them to seeke for peace of us, which is made, and they dare not breake. But that which is best, one Pocahuntas or Matoa the daughter of Powhatan, is married to an honest and discreete English Gentleman Master Rolfe, and that after she had openly I2renounced her countrey Idolatry, confessed the faith of Jesus Christ, and was baptized; which thing Sir Thomas Dale had laboured along time to ground in her." - Alexander Whitaker via Ralph Hamor at Virtual Jamestown

For more information about Pocahontas's names, check the Four Names of Pocahontas page on this website.

The ostrich feather fan

Various authors have commented on the white ostrich feathers we see in the Van de Passe engraving, and which are also present in the oil painting copies of the engraving.

Rasmussen & Tilton, Pocahontas; Her life and Legend (1994):

"She holds an ostrich feather, which had long been a symbol of royalty." p. 32

Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma (2004)::

"Long delicate fingers hold a fan of ostrich feathers, a symbol of royalty." p. 152

Gunn Allen, Pocahontas: Medicine Woman Spy Entrepreneur Diplomat (2003)

"In one hand, a three-plumed white feather fan is propped gracefully, signifying her office as Beloved Woman--a significance perhaps known only to her and the Powhatan members of her party. That she holds this staff of office, as it were, for this formal portrait says much of her self-image and the image she intended to transmit to the English rulers and high society." p. 152

As we see, the top two references describe the ostrich feathers as a symbol of royalty, while the third describes the white feathers as a symbol of Pocahontas's office as "Beloved Woman". Both interpretations could be correct, even simultaneously, but I'd like to look at these suggestions a little more closely.

On whether or not ostrich feathers are a symbol of royalty, that appears to be basically true. Ostrich feathers can be seen in the heraldic badge of the Prince of Wales, more specifically, the one that represents Edward the Black Prince (1330-1376). Ostrich feathers continued to be used in badges and emblems by members of the royal family in the 15th Century and beyond.

Heraldic badge of the Prince of Wales

The Black Prince's Shield for Peace

The badge of Prince Edward

Regimental badge - Royal Regiment of Canada

Whether the people responsible for arranging the Van de Passe engraving and the outfit Pocahontas wore for it intended the feather fan to be a symbol of royalty, however, is less clear. That is one likely explanation, of course, but the fan could also have been merely a prop or artistic choice. I am inclined to believe it was at least partially an intentional suggestion of royalty for the purpose of emphasizing Pocahontas's status as a "princess", but we'll never know for sure.

With the Gunn Allen reference, there seems to be a suggestion that Pocahontas was making a subversive gesture by holding the white feathers, quietly proclaiming to be a "Beloved Woman". (That the feathers were ostrich obviously would have no significance, since there were no ostriches in America, so Gunn Allen speaks only of the feathers being white.) While I see that this is a possibility, the idea works only if we can assume that Pocahontas chose on her own to hold the feather fan. If so, did she also choose her attire? It's probably more likely that the sitting was arranged, with most details of the portrait meant to fulfill the London Company's mission of propaganda for the Jamestown colony. Pocahontas had probably never had her portrait done before, so she would have likely cooperated with the request to hold an ostrich feather fan. We must also consider the possibility that there was no actual feather fan at all, but that it was added to the image by Van de Passe as an artistic or stylistic embellishment.

Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603) really seemed to love having her portrait done, there being hundreds in existence. In many of the portraits, she is not holding anything, but when she is pictured holding something, it is quite often a feathered fan. The center and right fan below are both white ostrich fans, not unlike the fan Pocahontas is seen holding in the Van de Passe engraving. Elizabeth I is also seen with colored feather fans, as in the Darnley portrait at left. Portraits like these would have helped to foster the association of ostrich fans with royalty in the minds of the viewing public, and since they preceded the Van de Passe engraving, we may assume Van de Passe and other prominent portrait artists were well aware of them. That the people who commissioned Pocahontas's portrait hoped to evoke a royal or noble presence by having her hold an ostrich feather fan would not be difficult to imagine.

Darnley Portrait, c. 1575

Bettes Portrait, c. 1585-90

More to come!